Ted Cruz: The Democrats are running scared because their agenda has failed

by Meghan

Wednesday, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:40 PM EST

On radio this morning, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) joined Glenn to discuss his fight to ensure those responsible for the IRS targeting of conservatives are held accountable, how he is holding up in the face of all the criticism, and why he believes the Democrats are “running scared.”

It has been nine months since the Department of Treasury Inspector General concluded the IRS had improperly targeted conservative and TEA Party groups. President Obama promised to hold feet to the fire and get to the bottom of the corruption, but no one has been indicted.

Instead, the person leading the investigation at the Department of Justice is an Obama campaign donor, and the FBI has publically said it does not plan on bringing charges against anyone involved. In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, Sen. Cruz asked that a special prosecutor with “meaningful independence” be appointed to investigate the criminal conduct. Ultimately, Sen. Cruz believes the American people deserve answers so that they can be sure it will never happen again.

“The IRS scandal… really bothers me because the people on our side of the aisle – there are very few that are really making this into the deal it should be made into,” Glenn said. “And if this were reversed, people would be crying bloody murder – as they should be. I would be on their side.”

As Sen. Cruz explained, abuse of power shouldn’t be a partisan issue. In fact, it should be something that unites the left and right, but in the case of the IRS that just doesn’t seem to be the case.

“Abuse of power for partisan ends is wrong no matter who is doing it,” Sen. Cruz said. “Not long ago a left-leaning law professor who voted for Barak Obama, Jonathan Turley, testified before the House of Representatives… He said Barak Obama has become the epitome of the imperial presidency. Barak Obama has become the president Richard Nixon always wished he could be.

“And as you know, when Nixon tried to use the IRS to go after his political enemies… there was bipartisan outrage. He was condemned by the media with front-page headlines over and over. And he was rightly condemned,” he continued. “The Obama Administration didn’t just try. It succeeded… And it ought to upset everybody, not just Republicans but Democrats, independents, anyone who cares about rule of law. We should not have the federal government trying to stifle political opposition.”

Whenever someone running for office comes on the program, Glenn asks this question: How is your soul? Today, Glenn asked Sen. Cruz a variation of that question. While the media, the left, and even members of the Republican Party continuing to hammer away, Glenn asked Senator Cruz how he is holding up.

“My soul is at peace. I’m doing great, Glenn. There is not a day that I don’t jump out of bed because the challenges we’re facing right now – our nation is in jeopardy. We’re bankrupting this country. The most common thing I hear… is: I’m scared for the future of this country. I’m scared that my kids and grandkids aren’t going to have the freedom and opportunity that I had. And that threat is real,” Sen. Cruz said. “So I jump out of bed every day excited and thrilled to have the chance, hopefully, to stand up and fight – to do something about it, to stand up and play some role helping mobilize the American people to pull this country back from the brink. What an extraordinary privilege to have the opportunity for all of us to play a part in saving this nation we love so much.”

When it comes to the 2014 midterms, Glenn is quite impressed with the field of principled, articulate, and passionate candidates he has had the opportunity to speak with over the last few months. More importantly, getting just a couple of the candidates elected could really change the debate in Washington.

“I have never seen a group of candidates as good as the candidates are right now,” Glenn said. “I mean I was excited when we found you and Rand and Mike, and I was like, ‘Hey, if we get these three guys in.’ But there’s more coming. We have some good candidates, [and] I don’t see the good candidates with the Democrats.”

“I think the Democrats are running scared right now because their agenda has failed,” Sen. Cruz concluded. “The country has the lowest workforce participation since 1978. Millions of people have lost their jobs, lost their health care, are hurting because of the failed Obama agenda. And I think the terrain is very favorable for Republicans to retake the Senate in November, if we stand for principle. That’s what we’ve got to do.”

Watch the entire interview below:

Your browser does not support iframes.

Republitards suck

I hear a couple of men with a lot of wishful thinking. Republicans are going to lose big in 2014. Democrats might not gain the House. But trust me they will make huge gains. Oh by the way Ted Cruz will not be re-elected after his term is over. He is the Allen West of Texas.

Carolyn Flynn

What sucks is socialism and communism…something the democraps embrace. How can you stand to look in the mirror? Because of fools like you we are losing our country. Thanks for nothing creep!

BlueMN

LOL They’re the worst socialists/communists ever. Corporate profits are soaring, and income inequality in the US is higher than some 3rd world countries. When does the revolution start, comrade?

Mike Nelson

Didn’t that all start to get as bad as it has when gov’t got MORE involved in the business world?

Shouldn’t you be rah-rahing for gov’t to get OUT of the business world, and business to get out of gov’t? Can’t happen, can it?

So your solution is to doublethink, “republitards are bad, mmkay?” while endorsing the administration and political party that court Wall Street to greater effect than the (R) has for two election cycles and somehow hope for things to change?

Or is it just that you like to poke people because you’re already half over the cliff and eagerly pulling the rope to get the rest of us over faster?

Do you even know what you stand for?

Guest

Deregulation led to The Stock Market crash of 1929, Black Monday in 1987, the Dotcom bubble in the 90’s and the crash of 2007-2008, hostile takeovers and predatory lending.

Regulation led to clean food, clean water, safe and effective medicine, safer roads, among many other benefits to society.

I don’t endorse the Obama administration and have always had my issues with it, but it is far superior anything the Republicans have offered to date. He also is slowly pulling the rope of recovery from the cliff the last administration set us on.

I won’t go into all I stand for but here are a few things:
-I believe “fair” is a good thing.
-I believe “greed” is bad, and one of the “seven deadly sins,” according to some, and different than “need” or “want.”
-I believe most of the people I’ve met are basically decent folks, yes, even most conservatives, so a “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” is not an evil entity.

Also I haven’t used the term for Republicans you did, mmkay?

Mike Nelson

You’re right; you didn’t use that word, and I shouldn’t have taken that tone; my apologies. Some of what I’m writing here isn’t dead accurate, but I just don’t have time to go and reference everything directly, so some of it comes from memory; I hope you take my meaning, rather than grouse about any immaterialities; certainly however, correct me if I’m wrong.

The panics of 1893, and again in 1907, led to a run on banks, which led to regulation, which led to the formation of the Fed (by some of the most enterprising criminals the world may have ever needed… but which was not done for the benefit of the population at large, and was motivated by nothing so much as a blatant power grab) which was supposed to end all future chances of such an event recurring. Thus, regulation itself led to the crash of 1929 – which you may rightly say (w)/(c)ould have happened anyway… but as long as we’re pointing fingers, the Fed was in the driver’s seat at that time, and the growing socialist tendencies toward further regulation did nothing to curb the anxieties of a population so recently fatted on the inception of a standardized currency. That said, I am glad I don’t have to exchange money between townships/states, but the fact of regulation did not prevent the further events of financial panic.

Regulation led to the increase in violent crime during the Prohibition years, and does still in the unwinnable “war on drugs”, one of my greatest criticisms of Reagan’s otherwise admirable record and vision of shared prosperity.

The abuses of a corrupted monetary system, fed by teh petro-dollar and largely stemming from the regulation and printing of proxy money starting in 1964, rather than remaining on the gold standard (which in part goes back to 1933 seizure of gold by the FDR administratin), led to the events preceeding Black Monday in 1987. Further, the herd mentality of thinking that the market could only ever keep going up – which again came about as a result of failings of the market to recognize basic tendencies of an economy to trend up/down naturally, as a normal method of self-adjustment, based on the greed-fear paradigm (both of which can be good motivations, in their own right and time) came about as a result of the trust of a public who’d been sold a bill of goods including a blind trust in the regulation of economic reporting that caused people to disbelieve their own experiences and fears, which were still there in living memory, based on the experiences of those who survived the Depression Era.

The DotCom bubble was a result of increased housing values stemming from the regulation of banks being unable to survive without giving money to borrowers who they KNEW were too risky, as pushed by the Clinton administration under the guise of, again, a growing economy, to which point can attest the dozens of abandoned housing developments and other assorted venues scattered across the US, and largely focused (as I understand; my knowledge of this geography is limited) in the resort areas of the country, namely the South and West.

Medicines that are practiced today have only recently returned to the “lost” knowledge of Eastern practices that as short a time as 10 years ago were considered voodoo and harmful (the VA only recently began authorizing chiropractic and acupuncture treatment, for example), which practices were effectively regulated out of practice by such wonderful organizations as the FDA, who today fail to authorize experimental cancer treatments for terminally ill cancer patients “because it might give them more cancer.”

Regulation led to the inclusion of fluoride in our drinking water, which is a poison, and just yesterday I read a report stating that Hot Pockets are being pulled because they contain “materials unsuitable for human consumption.” Organic farms and Amish farms are being raided for selling “illegal milk” and plants. Regulation of hemp out of the textile industry was a measure intended to prevent competition to the cotton plantations which, even as late as the early 1900s, were still in some cases treating black workers in a manner considered by the standards of the times subhuman, or at least inhumane.

Our roads and bridges are being built by the lowest bidders (which I tend to support) with illegal labor, in order that NAFTA can allow Mexican vehicles that do not pass US emissions standards to be driven by functionally illiterate illegals while American indies are being put out of business because they cannot compete and still comply with OSHA standards and licensing.

Regulation CAN have it’s benefits, and while I don’t mean to dirty-finger every aspect of your post, you cannot deny that regulation as a function of a corrupt and lawless government – which this nation has clearly sustained for at LEAST the last 5 years (and I contend at least the last 20), which number I cite because it has only so recently become as blatant as is now apparent – becomes a tool for the extortion of money from taxpayers whose lot is to be lied to by a complicit and immoral media, tormented by police forces whose operators have become “Law Enforcement” rather than “Peace Officers”, and told what “fair” is, when the definition clearly does not include the natural right to own and possess the fruits of one’s own labors.

It’s really hard to know what you stand for sometimes, because you’re often slippery in offering solutions or criticisms that are clearly reasonable and deserved, and you tend to (for lack of a better word) “attack” those whose statements do not directly assimilate to your standards.

Lastly, I take issue with your assertion that “fair” is a good thing. As an oldest child, I was rightfully the only one to go fishing with my father at age 6, because my brothers were too young. As a soldier whose rank was higher than others, I was rightfully admitted to areas where they could not go. As a man who owns property, pays taxes on that property, and still has the same say in voting as someone who pays no such tax, yet whose children go to school on my dime, I find no “fairness” in this at all.

It is my distinct and stoutly held position that “Fair” is a word used by people who fail to accept that WORK and ABILITY matter more than feelings, and there will NEVER be a circumstance where a wholly impartial entity can determine for persons who stand directly to gain or lose, what is equitable in a dispute between them. What I DO believe in is the brokering of agreements in such situations, such that “a benefit” is available to anyone who is willing to put forth effort in the securing of such an accord.

Our society is soft, stupid, uneducated, and hungry, at large, and because we have what we have, we think we can tell others what they deserve – and that sin knows neither color, nor creed, nor gender, and we fail to call things what they are simply for the purpose that they ARE what they are. Truth IS; “fair” is a lie, every time, to someone.

BlueMN

Whew, you are wordy, but at least you’re more civil than most here. I’m going to try to be brief as possible and make just a few points:

-“…growing socialist tendencies toward further regulation..” You seem to be equating all regulation with socialism, also I doubt Coolidge and Hoover were ever accused of being a bunch of Reds.

-“…regulation itself led to the crash of 1929…”
Loose credit and banks willing to risk deposits on the Market, practices such as buying stocks on margin, and speculation did that.

-Fluoride, Hot Pockets, illegal milk, etc.
Fluoride is indeed a poison, but it’s in amounts so minute, it’s harmless to us but it kills tooth decaying bacteria. Do you see people dropping dead from fluoride poisoning? That was a tinfoil hat argument in the 1950’s.
As for the rest, do you really want risk botulism from unregulated food? Most of us do not.

-” As a man who owns property, pays taxes on that property, and still has the same say in voting as someone who pays no such tax, yet whose children go to school on my dime, I find no “fairness” in this at all.”
This made me laugh, it really reveals what the Tea Party is all about; a return to feudalism when only the propertied nobles had any rights or voice and the peasants had better mind themselves. Maybe they should eat cake?

Mike Nelson

It’s hard to have a serious conversation here without posting the Wall of Text, so apologies, and thanks for reading; I was not confident that you would, after seeing how long it turned out… and I stopped with about half of what I’d wanted to say, heh…

Lincoln is extolled as one of our greatest presidents, and his violations of the Constitution were, in my view and 150 years later, the best of the bad options. Was he a Red? No. Were the implementation of the era of Reconstruction over-regulating the lives of some people? Yes. Was it for a good intention? Yes. Was it the right action? That, I don’t know… but I do know that one of the results of interference in local politics spawned as a result of this regulation was the Massacre of New Orleans. A whole different ballgame, but a prescient example of the dangers of central planning and pushing an agenda too fast.

I’d like to take issue with parts of each of your points, but won’t suffer your waste of time again, since we appear to simply disagree. The short story is that “bad things [can/do] happen” whatever regulations exist. When bad regulation is not addressed (and our PC culture, endorsed, enforced, and proliferated, starting in public schools, prevents conversations and learning being relevant as opposed to reticent), more bad things can happen, than when people are held personally accountable. We have become a pre-punishment society in many ways, and the motivation for this behavior is a belief that safety > liberty, on which point I expect that we will again disagree. To learn within a system that can die, or change, is something we have all experienced, and it is a perfect example of something that “isn’t fair.”

To me, it’s rather on the same level that cutting off the hand of a thief (who has committed a crime) is a visible lesson to the masses (to not commit the crime of theft), as compared to when an outbreak occurs (for any reason), and then that biz is punished,or at least the reason for the outbreak is addressed directly and effectively. Let’s face it: the Tom Cruise movie was bad, but if it happened IRL (thought crimes) it would be much, much worse.

While amputation is an archaic reference in this conversation, and near-to-ridiculous perhaps, the point remains valid in context. Raw milk = natural product; HGH = 10yo puberty. To me, outbreak may mean something somewhat different than to you, but imo botulism is just as absurd a leap as amputation.

The one thing I can’t let pass is about the taxes and schools. If our schools were teaching financial responsibility; if jobs that are open now could be filled by fresh grads; if trade schools were extolled as an honorable pursuit for those simply uninterested (let alone unFIT) for college); if the politically motivated (and apparently motivated by little else, in my state of WI, or nearby IL) teachers were concerned with the actual education of kids and the learning involved, rather than teaching how to pass tests regulated into the system by pols whose pockets are lined with union dollars, it could be a different story – but I’m a HS dropout (THREE times), an army vet, a college dropout (again, THREE times) who has never stopped reading and educating myself, and a disabled vet on a $40k income who managed to buy a house because of of vet’s loan terms (that kinda suck, but enable the option), so I’m not very sensitive to the idea that I’m somehow against the poor. But I DO believe in an ownership society, because when I look at the state of the parks in various sections of the city, it’s clear who does not care, and who does.

There are many more options to succeed than it sounds like you accept as factual, and while you may see that kids educated in HOMES rather than a public system as archaic and feudal, I see it as the basis for the diversity to which -many- people who take your positions give lip service, but for which [you/yours] ultimately fail to understand the basis.

And let’s admit it: cake is good stuff, but home-made cake > cafeteria cake ANY day.

Anonymous

Well said Carolyn Flynn! I share the same thought.

Anonymous

Yep demoncrats don’t stand for anything but to hate and hate anything about America

Anonymous

If the demoncrats win house you can say goodbye to America and your freedoms! Republicans are way better then the socialist hateful demoncrats! There are no more democrats they are America hater ommunists

Anonymous

It’s kind of odd, or I should say abnormal in your way of thinking, as to say that Ted Cruz and Glenn Beck are wishful thinkers, do you have any facts to back up your claim, (I didn’t think so) you do have a right to your own opinion, but at least make a comment that it is reasonable with facts! I might be wrong, but I think you may be on the wrong website! And by the way! Your username (Republitards Suck ) is disrespectful to the people that are patriotic! I highly doubt any patriot on this site would go to your left wing site, not alone be disrespectful.

Tony Viscardi

Your an idiot!! In case you havnt noticed, the country is in the TOILET!! There has not been a single Obama agenda that’s been successful and a delusional Harry Reid making a complete fool out of himself by calling millions of Americans liars. If a Republican had made anything close to such a statement, the MSM would be on them 24/7. Your party is trash that’s heading for the dump. Clueless sheep believe the garbage being fed to them.

TEXAS PATRIOT

Ted Cruz…. The BEST thing to happen to America since Reagan! #Cruz2016

BlueMN

Is he going to increase the growth of the Federal Government the highest since WWII, triple the federal deficit, and fund the Taliban like Reagan did too? #Cruz/Bachmann2016 #DefundTheGOP

TEXAS PATRIOT

Ted Cruz listens to the people. Get off the Kool-Aid. Anyone with half a brain knows what is really going on. Study true history for a change!

TEXAS PATRIOT

And your slams are not going to shut me up!

Anonymous

the EvilOne Prez increases government and dismantles our military at crucial times so BHO’s brotherhood the MuslimBrotherhood will take over the world for their caliphate and bho’ s dictatorship for the ” citizens of the world” NewWorldOrder dream utopia!

Mike Nelson

You say that like you don’t want the gov’t to grow, deficit to increase, and revolution to be the pursuit of the land.

I’m so confused….

Anonymous

That’s what demoncratsocialists are America haters oxyMoron emphasis on moron

TEXAS PATRIOT

He is the one who is confused! Has Reagan confused with, well, you know who. Let’s see if he is smart enough to figure it out!

BlueMN

No wonder you’re confused, Mike. You took so many twists and turns with my comment you’ll need a GPS to get back. I never said any of those things, and am not in favor of any of them. Just pointing out to your equally confused friend, PAT that Reagan wasn’t who she thinks he is.

Mike Nelson

A position of denial of the implications clear in your post (“Will he be like Reagan?” – because that was exactly and unambiguously the point you made, which does then lead to an assessment that it was your intentional meaning) fails to address the lack of taking any position at all. It can be a very confusing thing, indeed, especially for someone whose intent appears to be a slippery heckler. That’s a reputation you’ve created for yourself, so when you’re treated as such, don’t wonder why.

Please, I treat you with the respect an adult should appreciate, so don’t treat with me by assuming I won’t see through your “I never said that” deflections, or we’ll have to go into the reasons why Reagan spent the way he did (which I’m ok with disagreeing about, and do not entirely endorse in my own perspectives), why the deficit increased the way it did (during the course of an economic boom that is measured in decades, and where the struggle for world dominance was at that time period (between Commie and Cap).

You seem far too educated to have to endure such a complete lecture, so let’s assume we both know basic facts regarding the fight against communism as a world force, the unchecked (and imo unreasonable) growth, dominance, and subsequent stranglehold of the US on the Third World in relation to the inception and proliferation of the petro-dollar, and the (again, unreasonable) hubris of the Cold Warriors whose mission was to both oppose and humiliate the USSR politically, as well as the gains such power players *personally* stood to enjoy in embarrassing their opposite numbers in the spy game.

Have I truly missed the mark on this one, or do you find my following of your past statements so far out in the wild blue?

To be clear, Ted Cruz appears to be endorsing a return to Constitutional standards, which until the gold standard was abandoned were largely effective in creating the world power that the US became. Other factors notwithstanding, you certainly appear to be challenging the position that Cruz advocates as either foolish or naive.

[edit] Reading over them again, I do understand how my nebulous comments could have been taken entirely as a non sequitur, which is why I tend not to post blurbs.

Anonymous

Proud to be a Texan. Honestly I think we should extend that wall along the Mexican border all the way around Texas.

John Steele

Oh man, my side is splitting right now. If there’s another insecure internet tough guy thats more hilarious than Beck – I don’t want to know him. You so crazy!!

The Dems would be stopped dead in their tracks if the House leadership would actually LEAD! No chance of that happening.

joe michael villa

“Abuse of power for partisan ends is wrong no matter who is doing it,” Sen. Cruz

says the guy who shut down the government.

Anonymous

You can just hear the titillating snorts Ted Cruz does on the carpet of the Oval Office. He’s got his sights on the Presidency. You can small his desire hiding behind his every word.

Deckard426

The Democratic agenda has failed? Really? The Democrats haven’t raised the debt ceiling and printed $85 billion of worthless currency a month, all by themselves. No, no, that has been a group effort. Give the Republicans some credit for that. The only question left concerning the debt is, what comes after a trillion?